AIG makes me sick

[masher44]

Devil's Advocate....

You get a loan to run your business from someone, they give you the money, if they said I am going to give you the money as long as I get to tell you how to run your company......

Piss off.....

The only strength AIG has left is people power.

OK let the flaming begin :leaving:

 

[sledge]

Devil's Advocate....

You get a loan to run your business from someone, they give you the money, if they said I am going to give you the money as long as I get to tell you how to run your company......

Piss off.....

The only strength AIG has left is people power.

OK let the flaming begin :leaving:

No flaming necessary...right on point. Look at who is leading the charge against AIG et al....frigging clueless people with Z E R O experience running a business, let alone a huge multi-national.

 

[MacGyver]

They lost 61 Billion, not million in the 4th quarter.

Thanks Masher, my bad. These numbers are too big to keep track of.

 

[old377guy]

my blood is starting to boil - i'm signing off!!

 

[LaughingCat]

Find me one person sympathetic to these people. They got a BS contract from executives who fried the company, then decided to contractually obligate the company to pay even more to these thieves. There should be an international tribunal, not a debate.

 

[Wardey]

Yeah, This sets my azz on fire too !!! I think they should have to give the Gov back every dime and fall on their azz !!! Dave

 

[Audiofn]

And I agree it is stupid but if we get pissed off over 100 million while our investment is 170 billion we are nuts. They do need to retain key employees. Sales agents, middle management etc etc. Upper management got them into trouble. Not the people doing their job and what they were told to do. Senior management??? I am not sure what that means? I have a feeling people are getting paid that shouldnt be but some of those people should. If all the talent leaves than we can kiss goodbye the 170 billion we already gave. AIG will be viable again. If it failed, I am not expert but I would say it would be huge....

Agreed. If any of that money when to the CEO, board.... then I say WTF. If the money went to a employee that met or exceeded his goals and was counting on that money to put his kids through school, pay for a home loan... then I am OK with that. Some people are paid with bonuses not checks. So I am willing to bet that most of this was more compensation for work then bonus payments. The "news" just loves to call it bonuses because it gets people all worked up like they are in this thread.

 

[BUIZILLA]

agreed. If any of that money when to the ceo, board.... Then i say wtf. If the money went to a employee that met or exceeded his goals and was counting on that money to put his kids through school, pay for a home loan... Then i am ok with that. Some people are paid with bonuses not checks. So i am willing to bet that most of this was more compensation for work then bonus payments. The "news" just loves to call it bonuses because it gets people all worked up like they are in this thread.

+1

 

[glassdave]

correct me if I'm wrong but didnt the UAW have to make concessions and jump through hoops to get the auto industry bailout? These guys are above that?

 

[rbhudelson]

And I agree it is stupid but if we get pissed off over 100 million while our investment is 170 billion we are nuts. They do need to retain key employees. Sales agents, middle management etc etc. Upper management got them into trouble. Not the people doing their job and what they were told to do. Senior management??? I am not sure what that means? I have a feeling people are getting paid that shouldnt be but some of those people should. If all the talent leaves than we can kiss goodbye the 170 billion we already gave. AIG will be viable again. If it failed, I am not expert but I would say it would be huge....

Agreed. If any of that money when to the CEO, board.... then I say WTF. If the money went to a employee that met or exceeded his goals and was counting on that money to put his kids through school, pay for a home loan... then I am OK with that. Some people are paid with bonuses not checks. So I am willing to bet that most of this was more compensation for work then bonus payments. The "news" just loves to call it bonuses because it gets people all worked up like they are in this thread.

That is the story no one wants to tell. It is contingent income for employees that met their numbers.

Here is the latest "Rep. Peters said his bill would create a 60% surtax on bonuses over $10,000 at any company where the U.S. government has an equity stake of 79% or more in the company.

"Currently, AIG is the only company that meets this threshold," Rep. Peters said in a statement. "The legislation I'm proposing will get taxpayers their money back. "It is beyond outrageous that the very people who brought AIG to its knees and helped create the current financial crisis are scheduled to receive hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses while tax dollars keep their company afloat," he said."

Now that scares the crap out of me. Who's company employee's are they going to go after next?

 

[masher44]

The more I thought about it the more it is BS. MONTHS later our retard politicians want to come in and run the show after already loaning the money.

EVERY SINGLE media person has jumped on the bandwagon too. Now they want to tax the crap out of them and pay people who got screwed by Madoff. What a joke.

F the government, Dems and GOP, all a bunch of jerk offs that know nothing about anything, especially about how a real company runs, never mind a real company that made some bad decisions and is now fighting for its life with 180 billion of our money.

AIG insured BILIIONS of the loans that government policy and mis management forced down peoples throats....

Now they all say we should have let AIG fail. retards

 

[Geronimo36]

If that's true that Treasury signed off on this it's total b.s. The government own's 80% of AIG and if they want to sue the federal government so be it let them start the freaking processs... Either way paying bonuses or commissions when your insolvent and need taxpayer money just to stay afloat is ridiculous.

That's why most of these companies should be forced into bankruptcy if they are insolvent...otherwise your going to keep rewarding people who helped bring them down....who's to say that most of these so called bonuses or commissions aren't tied to failed policies that we (the actual people paying the government) are having to bail out...total b.s. in my book...

Rewarding failure seems to be the Democratic way these days and I can't say that I agree with it one bit....just my $.02...

And if the government would have let them file for bankruptcy I bet they wouldn't have been obligated to honor those contracts..... Before handing over the money the gooberment should have done their due diligence so something like this didn't happen...

Shame on AIG and double shame on the moron's running our country...

 

[Geronimo36]

i dont know where the bonuses went, and i agree they should have just let AIG sink, BUT as devils advocate, what if the bonuses went to employees who individually hit all there goals and bench marks and worked their buts off selling loans, in sales arent most jobs and job contracts tied to some sort of incentives for personal success....

still BS either way, but there might be more than we know

Depends how the bonus' are structured... In most cases a bonus is tied to personal performance and corporate performance usually on the order of 60/40 or some variation... so if the person meets their goals they get the personal bonus but not the corporate bonus... If we're talking sales people, the bonus is part of compensation and strictly given based on sales figures... If they meet their figures they have to pay or they can sue...

The media does not address what/why/how the bonuses were paid so it might be more media BS....

 

[rbhudelson]

Cuomo details AIG bonus payments

NEW YORK—Seventy-three employees of American International Group Inc. received bonuses of more than $1 million dollars out of the more than $160 million in bonus payments that sparked widespread outrage this week, according to New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo.

In a letter Tuesday to Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Committee on Financial Services, Mr. Cuomo detailed some of the bonus payments that AIG paid out to members of its financial products subsidiary last week.

Mr. Cuomo urged Rep. Frank to use the information, compiled as a result of his office's ongoing investigation into executive compensation at AIG, when the committee takes up the issue at a scheduled hearing Wednesday.

"These payments were all made to individuals in the subsidiary whose performance led to crushing losses and the near failure of AIG," Mr. Cuomo said in the letter. "Something is deeply wrong with this outcome," he said.

The highest bonus was $6.4 million, with six other employees receiving more than $4 million, and 22 individuals receiving bonuses of $2 million or more, according to Mr. Cuomo. In addition, he said, 11 of the individuals who received "retention" bonuses of $1 million or more are no longer working for AIG.

Mr. Cuomo issued a subpoena to AIG on Monday seeking the names of individuals who received the bonuses. In a letter to AIG Chief Executive Officer Edward Liddy earlier on Monday, Mr. Cuomo demanded the names of the employees, their positions, their job descriptions, information on their performance, and details of their employment contracts.

According to Mr. Cuomo, his office has also obtained the contracts under which AIG decided to make the payments, which include a "shocking" provision that required most individuals’ bonuses to be equal to their 2007 bonuses "despite obvious signs that 2008 performance would be disastrous in comparison to the year before," he said.

AIG has argued that it had to pay the bonuses because of existing contracts. AIG declined to comment.

Again, I don't want the government to be able to single out my company and levy additional taxes on my employees because we make more than they think we should - under any circumstance.

 

[Tommy Gun]

Do you think it logical that the Lender (the taxpayers) has the right to know the names of those that received the funds from the Lender? Geez, can you imagine what would happen if that info. was made public?

I have a feeling that the IRS may be interested in the bonus recipients.

 

[rbhudelson]

Do you think it logical that the Lender (the taxpayers) has the right to know the names of those that received the funds from the Lender? Geez, can you imagine what would happen if that info. was made public?

I have a feeling that the IRS may be interested in the bonus recipients.

No - I don't. But I also don't believe that the Lender in this case equates to (the taxpayers), even though the taxpayers supplied the funds. The lender is the government. I don't see it any different than your local bank. I'm a depositor but I don't classify myself as (the lender) on all the loans the bank makes.

The IRS should have no more interest in them as in anyone that receives a paycheck.

 

[Audiofn]

Seems like the Gov. is now on a witch hunt. They are trying to make it out like they did not know this was going to happen. They probably figure that this will make them look better if they go after big bus.. I think it makes them look like a bunch of fools for giving out the money with out an understanding of how it was going to be spent. After all didn't they promis us that......

 

[masher44]

Fvcking commie bastards. SBRT is making a donation to the AIG stripper and coke party fund

 

[Dude! Sweet!]

As much as I hate to admit it, I agree with the Mash... (Strippers and coke and the more boring part...)

You know, it doesn't matter if the bag is red or the bag is blue, if the bag is full of sh*t, its still just a bag of sh*t...

 

[sledge]

Check my math, but $170mil is 0.10% of $170bil. Should these people have gotten this kind of bonus, probably not. But if you want something to b!tch about, figure out what the value is of giving AIG $170Bil, and $90Bil of that going to other financial institutions. Instead of f*cking with the tax code, the congressional weazels should be putting the screws to Gaytner (sic) to get that money back. Heck of a lot better ROI there...